You gotta love the predictability of the framing from McCain's Media. John McCain challenges Barack Obama to go to Iraq, and so he goes. Then he makes the exact same courtesy calls with other heads of state with whom he would be in close contact should he win the presidency that John McCain made just a couple of months ago, but according to Suzanne Malveaux on CNN's Late Edition, "some people" are worried that Obama is just a little audacious for making this trip. Riiiiigggghhhhttt. Just who would be these people, Malveaux? Would they be those same GOP/RNC types that have been whispering these ridiculous slurs because Obama's trip was so successful and made their candidate look like an intemperate, ill-prepared and out of touch amateur?

Senator, I want to use a word that you love to use, "audacity." A lot of people looked at the trip and they saw the palaces, the world leaders, the 200,000 that were gathered in Berlin, and they said, "The audacity of this trip, it looks like he is running for president of the world."

Are we quoting Krauthammer and Brooks again on another media outlet? It appears so. The question goes out to McCain's Media yet again: by what standard have these two chuckleheads--who have yet to be right on anything, mind you--earned the privilege of framing the debate of this race?

Kudos to Obama for responding the only way you should to these intelligence-insulting media narratives.

OBAMA: Well, let me make a couple points. First of all, I basically met with the same folks that John McCain met with after he won the nomination. He met with all these leaders. He also added a trip to Mexico, a trip to Canada, a trip to Colombia, and nobody suggested that that was "audacious."

I think people assumed that what he was doing was to talk to world leaders who we may have deal with should we become president. That's part of the job that I'm applying for.

↓ Story continues below ↓

And so -- so I was puzzled by this notion that somehow what we were doing was in any way different from what Senator McCain or a lot of presidential candidates have done in the past.

Transcripts below the fold

MALVEAUX: Senator, I want to use a word that you love to use, "audacity." A lot of people looked at the trip and they saw the palaces, the world leaders, the 200,000 that were gathered in Berlin, and they said, "The audacity of this trip, it looks like he is running for president of the world."

And a lot of people looked and they want to know, what out of this trip did you take away that you feel makes you a stronger candidate to be a leader here?

OBAMA: Well, let me make a couple points. First of all, I basically met with the same folks that John McCain met with after he won the nomination. He met with all these leaders. He also added a trip to Mexico, a trip to Canada, a trip to Colombia, and nobody suggested that that was "audacious."

I think people assumed that what he was doing was...

(APPLAUSE)

... talk to world leaders who we may have deal with should we become president. That's part of the job that I'm applying for.

(LAUGHTER)

And so -- so I was puzzled by this notion that somehow what we were doing was in any way different from what Senator McCain or a lot of presidential candidates have done in the past. Now, I admit we did it really well.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

But that shouldn't be a strike against me. You know, if I was bumbling and fumbling through this thing, I would have been criticized for that. And so -- so that's point number one.

I don't know the political effect of this when I come back. You know, I think people are worried about gas prices; they're worried about job security; they're worried about their retirement fund, as the stock market goes down.

So probably a week of me focusing on international issues doesn't necessarily translate into higher poll numbers here in the United States, because people are understandably concerned about the immediate effects of the economy. And that's what we will be talking about for the duration.

I do think that, in terms of me governing, being an effective president, that that trip was helpful, because I think I've established relationships and a certain bond of trust with key leaders around the world who have taken measure of my positions and how I operate and I think can come away with some confidence that this is somebody I can deal with.

MALVEAUX: Senator Obama, hold on to that thought. We're going to take a quick break.

Latest Comments

Gee ... how about North Korea which actually HAS nuclear weapons? How about China which is building a whole new fleet of SLBM subs? Perhaps he's forgotten the words of Dimitry Rogozin, former deputy prime minster of Russia and envoy to NATO: “Iran is our close neighbor, just south of the Caucasus. Should anything happen to Iran, should Iran get drawn into any political or military hardships, this will be a direct threat to our national security,”

Here's a little blast from the past with regards to credibility.

Back in 2004, the CIA obtained a lap-top computer from "Iranian opposition forces" that was supposed to have been nicked from a top-secret nuclear laboratory. On it was information and schematics on nose-cone design, shaping uranium into spheres used in weapons, etc. The Bush administration went mad with joy, claiming the fabled "smoking gun."Well, it wasn't smoking, it was steaming, and it wasn't a gun - it was apile...

You see, the "Iranian opposition forces" turned out to be Mujahidin-a-Kalq. This group not only had long-standing ties to the Mossad, they also had direct connections to the Pentagon and US intelligence agencies, but were actually funded by the Bush administration. Most of the old pros in US intel discounted the whole thing, believing that the lap-top was actually an artefact created by the Mossad and passed on by the Mujahidin-i-Kalq. And well they might have been sceptical considering how badly they'd been screwed over by all the phoney intelligence promulgated by Cheney and his cohorts to justify invading Iraq.

Let's look at the facts, not the crack-pot junk intelligence of the previous administration. The International Atomic Energy Agency has madeover 3000 no-knock inspections in Iran. The traces of enriched uranium foundin Nantaz back in 2004 was determined, through testing, to have actually comefrom a centrifuge bought under the table from Pakistan. Then, of course, therewas the claim of the Bush administration that Iran had no need to developnuclear energy for civilian purposes. They apparently forgot that during theFord administration, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz all negotiated to sell 20nuclear reactors to the then-US puppet, the Shah of Iran. Finally, there is thefact that Iran's uranium is contaminated with heavy metals and unless theyreceived substantial technological support from outside the country, they'llnever be able to enrich uranium past the 20% margin which falls over 65% shortof that which is necessary for weapons. Is that outside support likely to beforthcoming? I wouldn't hold my breath...

There was a time when John Boehner would have been taken out and shot for committing treason with this stunt. Sadly, we have become too tolerant of sedition, which the Republicans have become emboldened to demonstrate, time and time again, ever since they LOST the Presidential Election [twice] to this President. How dare he not launch a war when he still sees room for peaceful negotiation and vigilance?. If waging war was the road to international peace, we would have peace now..............................wouldn't we???

Yep, no question about it, blowing Iraq and Afghanistan to smithereens has made us stronger. It has also created ISIS and made Al Qaeda stronger though. Netanyahu just wants the US to go to war in Iran to save his ass. Iran just might fight back and blow Israel to smithereens when anybody shoots the first bullet. Using Chaffetz's logic he just might talk Iran into blowing up Israel as a preemptive strike, since he's all for that kinda thing. Then what?